BS: A new political low take 2

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: Donuel
Date: 26 Dec 16 - 09:49 AM

You have heard the Mafia context excuse dozens of times in your life.

It goes like this, "It's not personal it's business".

With Donald Trump the context has been the reverse of the Mafia.

It goes like this, "it's not business, it's personal".

Both context's are a dangerous evil but the one based on a personality disorder is the most unpredictable.

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: akenaton
Date: 26 Dec 16 - 09:23 AM

Firstly I do not accept the context of the question.
Secondly as you know very well, it is a "Loaded Question"
Thirdly, if you require any further information on my views, refer to my post to Greg, 25th Dec 16   2:49pm.

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 26 Dec 16 - 07:57 AM

I have not attempted to smear Farage. Just reported what happened. If you saw it as a smear then surely you must agree he was wrong to do what he did. But even had I done so, I am perfectly within my rights to call out what I see as 'a new political low' which I believe it is. Others do not. Keith does not beieve it is and has told us his reasons for not believing so. You have not answered my question though, ake. Do you believe it is right that anyone should be allowed to besmirch a good man with misinformation that, ultimately, suggests that Brendan Cox has links with the very idealism that killed his wife and not have anyone comment on it?

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Dec 16 - 03:36 PM

Wa alaikum assalaam...Greg,   :0)

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: Greg F.
Date: 25 Dec 16 - 03:23 PM

As-salāmu alaykum   لسَّلَامُ عَلَيْكُمْ Ake.

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Dec 16 - 02:49 PM

That's fair enough Greg, that's your opinion.

Although I disagree with you over this partisan politics issue, I still find you straight and often funny....I respect you for that.

I do not respect trolls, two faced creeps or arse lickers whatever shade of political opinion they promote.

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: Greg F.
Date: 25 Dec 16 - 02:20 PM

it is unfair to silence me simply because you do not agree

Agreed - but then there's the fact that you have no bloody idea what you're talking about, that you invent your own "facts"[sic] and that you persist in smearing Farcebook-style feces about all over the place.

So while there may not be a case for "silencing", there's most assuredly one for calling your bullshit out for the bullshit that it is.

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 25 Dec 16 - 02:17 PM

The people in the queue were refugees.

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Dec 16 - 12:33 PM

OK Dave, Keith has already dealt with your attempted smear of Mr Farage, so nothing further needs to be said on that point.

Regarding President Obama, Mr Farage called him a "loathsome individual" after he had come to the UK in an attempt to influence the result of the EU referendum....something which had absolutely nothing to do with him or the USA. He threatened us that should we vote to leave the EU we would be "put right to the back of the queue" regarding any trade deals, completely ignoring the so called "special relationship which is supposed to exist between our two nation.
Apparently this relationship only exists when warmongering US presidents require support or somewhere to refuel their "rendition" aircraft?

The queues of people were not in my opinion dark skinned, more like Eastern European or Middle Eastern and the queues were to accurately represent the numbers of people who were lining up to take advantage of the EU ruling on freedom of movement. The last figures show that numbers entering the UK through EU auspices have indeed increased and will continue to increase until Brexit is realised.

Acme, I have no wish or intention of discussing with you, so you can ignore my posts....however it is unfair to silence me simply because you do not agree with my political views. There are other members who like to discuss politics.

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 25 Dec 16 - 10:39 AM

UKIP, BNP, they're both loathesome. Sounds like UKIP has filled in the power vacuum when BNP fell apart a while back. Ake, I'm not debating this with you any more, and if you continue to trash threads with your one-note statements (they couldn't be considered "argument" in the sense of debate because you show no evidence of learning or adjusting your opinions based upon current events or FACTS) you may find yourself edited out of conversations.

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 25 Dec 16 - 08:06 AM

Examples of Farages loathsome politics

1. As detailed in this thread
2. The poster that he supported showing queues of dark skinned people waiting to get into the UK
3. Referring to Barack Obama as a loathsome creature who cannot stand Britain

Three just off the top of my head. Do you support him attacking a widower by suggesting he has links to the extremism that killed his wife, ake?

Oh, and a merry Christmas to you too.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 25 Dec 16 - 07:23 AM

Acme can speak for herself, but I feel pretty confident in saying that she has a far better grasp of everything that we have ever discussed here than you. By a country mile. Well, I suppose you may know a little more about Pedigree Chum for greyhounds.

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Dec 16 - 06:39 AM

Mr Farage and the BNP ARE "poles apart".

Acme's comment indicate her grasp of UK politics, I am still waiting for examples of his "loathsome politics"

Every thinking person is disturbed about the effects of Islamic Fundamentalist terrorism, especially given the present rates of migration from the middle East through the EU open borders, your characterisation of all these thinking people who number many millions in the West, is not only "deplorable" but inaccurate.

In fact you do not have a dog in this race, as the US does not and quite rightly would not, accept unregulated immigration from these regions.

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 25 Dec 16 - 05:13 AM

I agree with all you say about his rotten character but must correct you slightly: Farage is not a member of the BNP. UKIP is his outfit. I'm sure that's what you meant. They are different but not exactly poles apart.

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 25 Dec 16 - 02:12 AM

Ake, you can dish out all of the SHIT that the Russians pushed about Hillary, yet the long-standing facts about the racist BNP's Farage upset you? Pull up your socks, fella, if you can keep dishing it out for months on end you'd damn well better be able to take it when your rep is a documented as being a bigot and a panderer to the lowest-common-denominator. There is no question as to his low moral character. His nasty characterizations of anyone who isn't a white xtian are deplorable.

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: Greg F.
Date: 24 Dec 16 - 08:03 PM

Mr. Farage, Ache, is a piece of shit. As is Trump.

Get over it.

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: akenaton
Date: 24 Dec 16 - 07:12 PM

Acme if you are so well versed on UK politics could you please give some examples of Mr Farage's "loathsome politics"?

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: akenaton
Date: 24 Dec 16 - 07:09 PM

Mr Farage is arguably one of the most influential politicians of the last few years.

He almost singlehandedly secured the referendum in favour of the UK leaving the EU, he also assisted Mr Trump in his dramatic victory in the American Presidential election.....he is an extremely clever and well informed politician.....The fact that YOU do not agree with him or his views is of no consequence, the facts speak for themselves.

The policy of unregulated immigration is unsustainable and Mr Farage was instrumental in making every mainstream political Party accept that fact......"liberals" can cry racist till they are blue in the face but the facts say something very different.....we must have the ability to control our borders and that does not mean an end to immigration, it simply means that we can control who and in what number people migrate into the UK.

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 24 Dec 16 - 06:36 PM

Well said.

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 24 Dec 16 - 06:29 PM

Farage sets himself up to be smeared, ridiculed, dismissed, disbarred, impeached, whatever else you can do to him. His politics are loathsome - even this American knows that much.

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: akenaton
Date: 24 Dec 16 - 06:04 PM

Keith has the matter summed up to a tee.
Dave should admit that he was wrong in his attempt to smear Mr Farage.

Happy Christmas to all members lapsed, current and debarred! :0)

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Dec 16 - 03:32 PM

No. I have not Keith, but it is late on Christmas eve and there are better things to do with our time. I intend to enjoy myself. I suggest you do the same. Time is the thing that is in most short supply.

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Dec 16 - 02:24 PM

I just find it offensive to suggest that someone who has lost his wife to extremism has extremist links. I thought that was enough justification. If you do not, fair enough, but I am not on my own nor, I suspect, are you.

Not alone? Of course we are not. Every possible view is held by someone.
So what?

I would agree with you Dave if it was a baseless smear, but I doubt that it was.
If it has some truth in it, is it still "a new political low?"
How certain are you of the facts Dave?

Have you dropped your objection to him replying to the criticism put to him live on radio?

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: Greg F.
Date: 24 Dec 16 - 11:42 AM

You may disagree. Not a good measure of whether I am right or wrong

Actually, Dave, it is an EXCELLENT indicator that you are indeed correct if The Professor disagrees with you, as has been proven without a doubt by his extensive posting history of arrant nonsense, supposition, false conclusions, lies, distortions & etc.

As for what The Professor "believes" ... who the hell cares?

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Dec 16 - 10:51 AM

I just find it offensive to suggest that someone who has lost his wife to extremism has extremist links. I thought that was enough justification. If you do not, fair enough, but I am not on my own nor, I suspect, are you.

If I may use an folk based illustration. I used to black up to play various roles in the Abram Pace Egg play. Some people said it was offensive and I argued for a long time that it was not. Then I had an epiphany about it. If someone genuinely finds something offensive then, to them. it is. If it is offensive and there is a perfectly viable alternative, then it should stop.

From the Huffington transcript you provided -

"Yes well of course he would know more about extremists than me, Mr Cox.
"He backs organisations like Hope not Hate who masquerade as being lovely and peaceful but actually pursue violent and very undemocratic means.

That is offensive in the extreme. It is, ultimately, suggesting that by supporting extremist organisations, Brendan Cox was somehow culpable in the murder of his own wife. I find it sickening. You may disagree. Not a good measure of whether I am right or wrong, I know, but I think you will find I am with the majority.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Dec 16 - 10:34 AM

Jim
The answer is simple, they didn't take it public is because, beyond critiscism otf Israel, it does not exist any more than it does in any other political party.

But we know it does Jim because so many senior people have acknowledged that it does.
The NEC itself said it was appalled by recent cases, and that it is a serious problem.
That is proof Jim.

Dave,
Do you believe that Hope not Hate is an extremist organisation and that Brendan Cox has links to extremism?

I know nothing about it Dave, but I know Farage to be wily and clever.
As I said earlier, he is not known for making statements he can not support.
I predict that the legal case will be quietly forgotten or it will fail.
We will see.

but I believe it is you that have misread it so we will just have to agree to differ.

Then why can you not produce something offensive from Farage?
Is anything in that Huffington transcript offensive? What?
"A new political low" is a huge claim and you have failed to even remotely justify it.

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Dec 16 - 08:23 AM

Thank you, Keith, but I believe it is you that have misread it so we will just have to agree to differ. Answer me one question though. Do you believe that Hope not Hate is an extremist organisation and that Brendan Cox has links to extremism?

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 24 Dec 16 - 05:10 AM

BDS and ANTISEMITIC SMEARS
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 24 Dec 16 - 05:08 AM

"They did describe their experiences of anti Semitism, to the Labour leadership."
Not what I asked Keith - why didn't they take it further?
You said it was out of loyalty to the party - that is antisemitic.
The answer is simple, they didn't take it public is because, beyond critiscism otf Israel, it does not exist any more than it does in any other political party.
Supporters of the Israeli regime, particularly those who oppose B.D.S., were perfectly at liberty to go to the press with it - they didn't.
Unless and until somebody does, there is no case to answer - British justice, natural justice and simple common sense - you do not accuse siomebody of something and refuse to describe it and no jury in the land would convict somebody without considering fully what they have been accused of.
You live in an Alice Through the Looking Glass World - "Off with his head".
BDS and ANTISEMITISM

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Dec 16 - 04:48 AM

Jim,
Why did they not describe the antisemitism you claim they were subjected to?It will take you a few seconds to get me off your back

They did describe their experiences of anti Semitism, to the Labour leadership.

Dave,
on twitter. Instead of responding in kind, Farage used his high profile public position

No. It was put to him to respond to live on LBC, otherwise he probably would not have responded at all.
Nothing sick in that. Not any kind of "new political low."

to smear Brendan Cox and the Hope not Hate

Is it a smear? I do not know but Farage is not known for making statements he can not support.
I predict that the legal case will be quietly forgotten or it will fail.
We will see.

You complain profusely when someone on here, a little read specialist forum, tries to smear you with what you deem to be lies.
Of course I do! They are lies.

Yet when a public figure abuses his prominent position to tell the world a widower is linked to the very thing his wife was fighting against when she was murdered, it is perfectly acceptable to you?

Absolutely not, unless it is true.

There is no difference in our morality Dave and please do not suggest such a thing. I just believe that you have misread this event.
Do have a joyful family Christmas.
keith.

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Dec 16 - 03:02 AM

The more the merrier, Nigel. He will also say it is the "moment to reach out to somebody that might disagree with us" so, in that spirit and it being the season of goodwill...

Although I simply cannot understand your viewpoint, Keith, you are entitled to hold and express it without fear. It may be a sticking point in this discussion but I hold no animosity and wish you and your loved ones a happy and peaceful Christmas.

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 23 Dec 16 - 08:45 PM

From: Dave the Gnome - PM
Date: 23 Dec 16 - 01:53 PM

Just heard some brilliant news on the BBC. Brendan Cox is to deliver the alternative Christmas message. on Channel 4 on Christmas day. In it he will call for an end to the rise in hatred.

Just a little late. I believe HRH Prince Charles has already covered that subject very well, also on "Thought for the day"

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 23 Dec 16 - 02:18 PM

Precisely, Keith. Brendan Cox made a perfectly valid statement on twitter. Instead of responding in kind, Farage used his high profile public position to try to smear Brendan Cox and the Hope not Hate campaign as being extremists. It is just sick and I simply cannot understand how anyone can attempt to justify it. You complain profusely when someone on here, a little read specialist forum, tries to smear you with what you deem to be lies. Yet when a public figure abuses his prominent position to tell the world a widower is linked to the very thing his wife was fighting against when she was murdered, it is perfectly acceptable to you? As I said earlier, there is not point in continuing this discussion with you. Our moralities and sensibilities are poles apart.

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Dec 16 - 02:04 PM

"
Jim, I answered your questions on the Labour Party thread."
You didn't - it will take you a second to answer it here
Why did they not describe the antisemitism you claim they were subjected to?It will take you a few seconds to get me off your back
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Dec 16 - 02:02 PM

Here is all of what Farage said according to Huffington,

When asked about Cox's comments during an interview on LBC this morning, Farage responded: "Yes well of course he would know more about extremists than me, Mr Cox.
"He backs organisations like Hope not Hate who masquerade as being lovely and peaceful but actually pursue violent and very undemocratic means.
"And I'm sorry Mr Cox but it is time people start taking responsibility for what happened. Mrs Merkel has directly caused a whole number of social and terrorist problems in Germany, it's about time we confronted that truth."
Forced to acknowledge that no-one has arguably been more on the receiving end of this sort of extremism than Cox, Farage said: "Yes and it's a terrible thing that happened to his family with the murder of his wife but he continues to be active in the political arena and as I say, given some of the organisations that he supports I can't just stand here and say 'I'm not going to respond'."

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 23 Dec 16 - 01:57 PM

...Farage then of course responded by trying to smear by linking himto extremists. And that is where I came in.

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 23 Dec 16 - 01:53 PM

Just heard some brilliant news on the BBC. Brendan Cox is to deliver the alternative Christmas message. on Channel 4 on Christmas day. In it he will call for an end to the rise in hatred.

Now, I wonder why they did not offer that job to Farage? I wonder what the hate mongers will make of it?

Cheers

DtG

PS, that same article comments that Earlier this week, Mr Cox clashed with Nigel Farage on Twitter after the former Ukip leader said that the Berlin lorry attack would be "[Angela] Merkel's legacy".

Mr Cox responded by saying "blaming politicians for the actions of extremists" was a "slippery slope"

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Dec 16 - 01:33 PM

Dave,
The criticism by Brendan Cox was on twitter BTW, not in an interview.

Farage made his comment about Merkel on twitter too, but Brendan's criticism was put to Farage on LBC so he could not duck responding to it.

I do not believe there is any excuse for the actions of Farage

What actions Dave?
He replied to the criticism of him.
What exactly are you accusing him, and now me, of doing that was so terrible?

Norman Tebbit's wife was maimed in a terrorist attack, and eventually died of her injuries. Did he get any special dispensations?

Jim, I answered your questions on the Labour Party thread.

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 23 Dec 16 - 01:13 PM

Thanks, Greg - Cross posted but the message was the same :-)

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 23 Dec 16 - 01:09 PM

This is not a thread about anti-Semitism in the Labour party, Jim. There seems to be enough of them going on already without turning this into another. This thread is about the depths to which some politicians will stoop to gain attention. I suppose the two things are loosely linked but unless you can link the two in a sensible manner here I would politely ask you to keep to the topic.

Many thanks in advance.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: Greg F.
Date: 23 Dec 16 - 01:07 PM

Can we get this back on track of Farage being an obnoxious lying arsehole (like his doppelganger Trump) and let the Zionist bigots/apologists destroy other threads as per usual?

Thank You.

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Dec 16 - 12:51 PM

Lat's settle this once and for all Keith
You claim there is a serious problem of antisemitism within the Labour Party
Why haven't the Jewish victims of this antisemitism gone public?
What is to stop them from going to the press, who would be more than happy top publicise it and get it stopped?
Simple - answer the question
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Dec 16 - 11:23 AM

"Not me then Jim."
Please stop lying stupidly Keith
You said exactly this - it is archived as this
If you doiid not say it, what excuse did you give for the Jewish members not revealing the nature of the antisemitism?
You have till the end of the day to makeup another porkie.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 23 Dec 16 - 10:51 AM

Fine, Keith, we know your position on this. I do not believe there is any excuse for the actions of Farage and his supporters, including yourself now. No need to confirm it any further.

The criticism by Brendan Cox was on twitter BTW, not in an interview. However it does not matter, it was Farages response that was unforgivable and as we are obviously poles apart there is no point in continuing the discussion.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Dec 16 - 10:44 AM

People who talk about Jewish pacts of silence to hide antisemitism Keith

Not me then Jim.

Dave,
From your post,
In August 2015, German president Angela Merkel responded to the growing migrant crisis by saying her country would take in 1million Syrians.

She was heavily criticised by right-wing politicians, who said this was an open invitation to terrorists.

In February 2016 Amri moved to Berlin and a month later came under investigation after a tip-off to police that he was preparing an act of terror.

He arrived in Germany as an asylum seeking refugee.

It is a widely held view that the open door policy allowed many Jihadists to enter, and has led to the upsurge in attacks in Germany.

An attack by a politician, who should know better, on a member of the public who has suffered a tragedy. Whatever spin you you would care to put on it there is no excuse to lambaste someone who has had their family destroyed by extremism by suggesting they have links to extremist groups.

No. The criticism was put to Farage in a broadcast interview and any politician would have had to give a full strength response.
Even tragic personal circumstance do not allow you free hits in politics.

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: Jack Campin
Date: 23 Dec 16 - 10:18 AM

Who did better than Britain at providing sanctuary for Jews fleeing the Nazis?

Japanese-occupied Shanghai. Look it up.

Geographically, the obvious place to flee to for most European Jews faced with annihilation was the USSR. I have not yet found any believable information about how many went there - every site I can locate on the web obscures the demographic facts behind mountains of ideological garbage.

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: Donuel
Date: 23 Dec 16 - 09:15 AM

IT GOT REAL

Less than two hours Putin announced that Russian needs to upgrade its tactical nuclear bombs when

Trump tweeted an expansion of our nuclear arsenal.
(collusion?)




I know we still use 8 inch floppies to run our guidance and detonation system. but a nuclear bomb race we do not need.

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: Charmion
Date: 23 Dec 16 - 08:51 AM

Who did better than Britain at providing sanctuary for Jews fleeing the Nazis?

Not Canada. Not the United States. Not Australia. Not any of the English-speaking countries.

The Dominican Republic, of all places, did better, offering settlement opportunities (accepted by only a few refugees) and, more importantly, travel papers that thousands used to find sanctuary elsewhere.

Bolivia was surprisingly welcoming, accepting some 20,000 Jewish refugees between 1938 and 1941.

The Mexican consul stationed in Marseilles under the Vichy regime was personally responsible for producing travel documents that allowed tens of thousands of Jews to get out of Europe via France. He was so successful that the Gestapo arrested him and his family, holding them in Germany for a year.

Check out the Holocaust Museum site for more information.

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: Jack Campin
Date: 23 Dec 16 - 08:48 AM

Why did you call the columnist his "sidekick?"

Just google "delingpole farage" and see what you get (I'm not about to recycle that shit). That's exactly what he is.

Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 23 Dec 16 - 08:27 AM

Nothing to do with Farage. Why did you call the columnist his "sidekick?"

Maybe for the same reason that you tend to lump everyone who argues against you as 'a little gang' and ask me to comment on Jim's or Steve's posts. But, point taken, I shall not use the term where it is not applicable again.

DtG